Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 9, 2009 10:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Annoying mediocre weirdness

dulldulcodances.jpg

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: wonsing Date: Jan 10, 2009 4:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

Reminds me of "Skelator's Castle"...

I'll be enjoying this MOTB of 1/10/78. And remember, "Arnold likes to smoke mamma's phatty"

http://www.archive.org/details/gd1978-01-10.aud.Rhinotrocity7.motb-0026.95068.flac16.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rastamon Date: Jan 10, 2009 5:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

better yet, the MOTB/SBD Matrix!!! http://www.archive.org/details/gd1978-01-10.mtx.Rhinotrocity7.motb.95134.flac16

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jan 10, 2009 11:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: You Rebel You

from your title, i had assumed this thread to be about post '82 Grateful Dead; don't you realize that if you continue to not clearly mark your threads as appropriately "non-dead", you may very well throw the entire universe of forum lurkers into uncontrolled pandemonium?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 10, 2009 12:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: You Rebel You

Yeah, I was glad you sent that email or the two of us might have been forced to sit in the corner with dunce caps while strat let us have it with the teacher's ruler.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jan 10, 2009 2:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: You Rebel You

dunce cap sometimes fits me, the ruler never

sent you a reply e-mail by the way, thanks again for the songs, even though i nuked the Beatles & Yes songs!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 10, 2009 3:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: You Rebel You

They deserve it, no doubt!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: elbow1126 Date: Jan 10, 2009 5:20pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: You Rebel You

You better hope you outlive me, because i will find your grave, pull the plug on 10-12-68 and fill your eternity with Revolver, The Beatles and Abbey Road.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jan 10, 2009 6:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: You Rebel You

then i may as well just go to hell, because that's exactly where you would be sending me

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 11, 2009 7:11am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Again, really hope you enjoyed those disks, Arb, and that the "fun" of discovery, rather than the irritation due to my inept book-keeping, entertained you yesterday.

My kids have slowly helped me build up a CD collection of the artists from the late 60s that I had used years ago to create "greatest hits tapes" (cassettes) made up from their albums. So, with these CDs, the latest arriving at Christmas, I just used Nero to extract the tunes and dumped them into a "hits" folder without keeping track, other than to give them my own abbreviated name. Some of the "officially titled tracks" came from a collection of 60s hits that a friend sent me, and I only mention it because if you do dig into the files, you find those are NOT WAVs as the bulk of the songs are (those I extracted via Nero).

Anyway, what I've noticed is that the sound level with different tracks varies (esp the commercial hits vs those I extracted). Do you know if using the "normalize all tracks" with Nero that would adjust them all to a common level?

Or is that something altogether different?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jan 11, 2009 7:44am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

yes, WT, i did notice that a number of tracks were not derivitive of .wav files, but no worries 'bout that from my end; as for the levels, i haven't really noticed enough for it to jump out at me, but then, unless it's glaring, i really don't pay attention to that sort of thing; some really great stuff that believe it or not i hadn't been so familiar with; you da man! ... err, i mean, da Prime Minister!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Arbuthnot Date: Jan 11, 2009 7:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

William Tell wrote: "Do you know if using the "normalize all tracks" with Nero that would adjust them all to a common level?"

it would seem that it should ... but i've never toyed with such a function and would probably blow something up if i did

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 11, 2009 8:09am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Yeah, I will try it and see--it always made me think they would do something "unnatural" to the tracks, so I never select it!

thanks

(oh, it is obvious to me when transitioning between a Hendrix track, like Hey Joe, and one of the others [ie, Jimi is loud and clear, the other less so] to the point if I have it on loud, I have to turn him down).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 11, 2009 9:08am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Normalizing just takes the highest peak in volume and makes that the maximum peak. It doesn't change dynamics, that would be the duty of a limiter or compressor. You should always normalize so the signal is hottest with the least noise before it hits the amp and makes more.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 11, 2009 9:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Hey NC--thanks, but showing my ignorance, I am not sure if I understand the expected outcome. What appears to be the case, from my twit like understanding, is that I have two tracks, one from one source, and one from another. To put it really simply, the one "sounds" louder than the other if I just use Nero to add them to a single Audio CD (if I played the original source disks, all tracks with each respect track I am speaking of sound similar in intensity).

So, I was thinking this normalize function would set a certain "overall intensity level" so that each track would sound to my ear, similar. But not sure that is what you are describing...or is it?

The whole notion of track having "inherent intensity" seems odd to me anyhow in this digital age. Sorta like when we used to make "hits" cassettes, a song from another cassette might sound low, while one from a record would sound high, but you could set the recording levels the same to compensate so the "hits" tape had all songs at roughly the same levels...

Does that make sense?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Edsel Date: Jan 11, 2009 9:47am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Like NC said, normalizing will only raise the highest peak to a value you set. Suppose there is a pop, or some other loud noise causing a temporary peak in the recording, that will be the peak. You could go through the entire recording and reduce those ugly peaks to the same level as the rest of the recording, then normalize the track, or use a compressor to "level" the track, but be careful with compression, it can do some odd things if you get carried away with it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 11, 2009 9:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Most music today is heavily compressed in comparison to older stuff. Since going over in the red on the volume meter means popping with digital as opposed to tube warmth with analog, more effort is made to keep the highest levels from clipping and increasing the total volume.

If you burn a CD and the maximum volume is -6db that means that you are only using like 12 bits of your 16 bit medium. The additional volume you need to turn it up on your reciever is noise and distortion laden.

There are people adamently opposed to compression as they feel it kills the dynamics. Normalizing is different than compression where you are turning some things up that are below a specific threshhold while turing others down that exceed that threshold. Normalizing simply looks at the sound file graphically and says, wow that drum roll at 3:10 is the loudest sound and it's 2db lower than the maximum allowed volume so let's turn the whole thing up 1.9db so the overall sound is louder. Less amplification is needed and therefore less noise.

If the original recording level is low, you are also turning up the noise as well but recorded noise is not as loud as amplified noise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_normalization

http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/radio/ACE-EM-SIG/QuickTipsArchives/nasium.htm

http://www.turnmeup.org/

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 11, 2009 12:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

Thanks, as usual, NC (& Edsel); I should've known there was a lot more going on!

That description makes perfect sense (re: increasing noise too when doing what I described!).

And thanks for the links.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 11, 2009 1:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: More nonDEAD drivel, ? for Arb...

No problem, as was mentioned above, compression can be misused very easily (apparently even with years of experience!) and I still find myself manually lowering the volume of problem peaks in tracks by hand with a mouse and then normalizing right up to (but not to) the limit. Never normalize the audio past 99% because the next conversion or program may push it over and POP. Nothing worse than clipped digital audio, nothing you can do to fix it.

When dealing with live recordings, unexpected feedback wails, crowd noise and microphone handling noises might stick out so much graphically that they are easy to zoom in on, lower precisely and therefore allow you to raise the overall volume.

Dynamics are great for expression in music but there is nothing more annoying than volume incontinuity from song to song in a mix on an album, which the very concept of is disappearing slowly anyway. But for us 20th century purists who think anyone can make a good song but not everyone can make a great album, the flow from one song to the next is as important as the flow from one chord or one verse to the next inside the individual songs.

Turn on the classical radio station next time you are driving and roll the windows down. You are hearing the last uncompressed music, or I should say you are not hearing the silent, stirring parts. Wind noise wiil cover up anything that is not being played at maximum volume and you will find yourself turning up the volume until the overture comes blasting back in rattling your cheap stock carboard woofers while you ignore the road texting your friends and feeding your virtual pet on your iphoney.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: kochman Date: Jan 10, 2009 7:05am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

My friend had that, it was fun to play with toy soldiers...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rastamon Date: Jan 10, 2009 7:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

(uh oh....) as long as my toys win! haha

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 10, 2009 11:23am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

It was "navarone mountain" playset I believe circa 1976. The lizards were not included. The music underneath proves you shouldn't play with such violent toys.

I traded my micronauts for microdots.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 10, 2009 12:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

Actually, I think it's kinda cool...I always thought they couldnt get the scales right for different components though (ie, rocks vs men vs tanks vs planes) unless you dropped down to 1/72" (I think?)...

Brings back memories. Growing up, as kids would grow out of it you could land massive reinforcements for peanuts by buying up their used stock as they quickly realized girls and drugs were expensive habits...much less, records.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 14, 2009 10:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

Yeah, even as a kid it bothered me that the landing craft and other accessories were not to scale at all.. I used to do the HO (1/96th if I remember correctly) and a brief flirtation with 1/48 before the discovering the wonder of 1/72 (and sometimes 1/76th what's up with that?)... you could get the same model airplane in 72 for a third of 48 and display twice as much... that is if you are a nerd and never packed it all away and stuck it under the stairs to dust, break and fade until you die and they sell it on ebay as an estate sale... hobbies....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Jan 14, 2009 10:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

from the thread title, i thought you were discussing this:

http://www.archive.org/details/paf2008-12-31.balcony.neumann140eq.96813.flac16

my bad.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 14, 2009 12:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

Oh yeah; there was this great company that made these little tanks and other vehicles, and I think you are right, they were 1/96 cause they were too small to match the HO men that came it sets of 48 men (like Afrika Corps, etc.), but they were the most realistic little tanks and such and they had everything. When my kids were little I went into a hobby store and the guy knew all about them, I think he said they were "Rocco" or crap, can't recall...will have to google and try to find them...or maybe they were HO...damn. Memory.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 14, 2009 12:42pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

Airtfix is the company and they were 1/76th all others are just clone molds of them and have been released in various forms throughtout the years... yeah I was into that too much, NERDISM runs in my family.

http://toysoldierhq.com/

I love the russian globby bootleg stuff...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Jan 14, 2009 2:13pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

Holy Crap!

Those are them!

Amazing...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Jan 15, 2009 1:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Annoying mediocre weirdness

I believe you may be thinking of the Matchbox plastic army men and vehicles that were HO or 1/96th scale now that I think about it!

NERD